Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« "This turnip makes Michael Foot look like Spartacus..." | Main | Amazonian adventures.... »

Tuesday, October 28, 2003

Comments

Chris Dalrymple

It's great to know that, the reaction of homes and gardens aside, someone cared enough to force these documents into the public sphere. Well done The Wyman Institute.

Simon

I agree...and I'm particularly glad they got involved. At first, it seemed like the only champion for my cause was David Irving. With friends like that... etc etc.

Mark Lloyd

It's been a fascinating saga for loads of reasons and I am pleased that it has finally sorted itself out in the "right" way.

simon

Actually - I don't think it has quite sorted itself out yet. I'm perfectly happy - but I think the Wyman Institute might have other ideas.

L

Thanks for that article. It is quite.. hilarious.

L

I mean THAT article. :o)

Donald Macgregor

Congratulations to all involved in getting a semi-reasonable response from H&G. I haven't seen anything about this in the British daily press - have I missed it? If not, why not send them all the story?
DFM

atira winchester

Oh my goodness.
I'm absolutely flabbergasted by the article. Isn't some kind of explanation or apology fitting from H&G?
Atira Winchester
Freelance Journalist
Jerusalem Post

Orla Mulholland

The text of the Home & Garden article may not have been original to the magazine.

The article states that Hitler “has a passion about cut flowers in his home" – in fact, according to Traudl Junge, Hitler’s private secretary, as told by her in the documentary film ‘Im Toten Winkel’, Hitler’s feelings for cut-flowers were passionate hatred, not fondness. He referred to cut-flowers as corpses and wouldn’t have them in his rooms. Frau Junge linked this to his vegetarianism – part of a general horror of ‘dead things’.

It sounds a bit like the text from the Home & Garden article is based on a mistranslation from German. It’s possible the whole thing is indeed a translation as you suggested, though it could have been put together from different, misunderstood sources.

Orla Mulholland
(Berlin)

haward soper

Hi ; put yourself in IPC's position. Would you want this stuff in the public domain? How much more embarrassing can back copies be than this one? It is a very funny story at this distance in time but acutely embarrassing for IPC

H

UK

mick

this story is so bizarre,
i loved it, . . . .
big biz being small minded,
so very typical of the
"Us and Them" scenario.
It is so wonderful seeing
"Them" put well and truly in their place.

Ian Macdonald

Just out of interest the bloke described as Hitler's builder on P195 is actually Albert Speer . At that time in 1938 as Hitler's architect he had a much lower profile than he would subsequently acquire during the war as Minister for Armamaments Production etc

Simon Waldman

Yep - and as Eric pointed out, the photo of Speer and Hitler overlooking the plans is the one that Speer actually used in his autobiography.

Peter Wakefield Sault

How little people in general understand about copyright law. Under the Berne Convention, copyright exists in any intellectual work from the moment of its creation, with or without a registration certificate (the UK does not provide any form of copyright registration and has simply copied the Berne Convention into British Law). The only times that copyright does not automatically belong to the creator is when the creator is working as an employee or under a properly written, signed and witnessed contract which specifically assigns copyright to the commissioner of the work.

A copyright myth, put about by publishers and record companies and other similarly disreputable people, is "copyright renewal". There is no such animal. When a copyright expires (50 years after creation for a corporation or 50 years from the death of an individual author) it is dead forever and the work is then in the public domain. The US extension to 70 years is not enforceable anywhere else in the world. Similarly the UK Parliament's passage of a law extending the copyright on 'Peter Pan' in perpetuity (the beneficiary of royalties being the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, in London, to whom the author assigned the copyright) is unenforceable elsewhere.

atira

Please take my comment off your website now. It comes up in all the search engines and is a little aggravating.
Thanks
Atira Winchester

The comments to this entry are closed.

At home with Hitler